Here's what my stack looks like at the point of failure:
#0 0x00007ffff293a2ae in auditsimdelete (jt=0x7ffff1438200,
w=0x55555586e240) at ../../../../jsrc/m.c:553
#1 0x00007ffff2939b14 in audittstack (jt=0x7ffff1438200) at
../../../../jsrc/m.c:648
#2 0x00007ffff2e753e3 in jtxplus (jt=0x7ffff1438200,
a=0x555555651240, w=0x555555651060) at ../../../../jsrc/vx.c:60
#3 0x00007ffff2e7c2b6 in plusXX (n=-50, m=1, x=0x555555768940,
y=0x5555556d17a8, z=0x5555556cfda0, jt=0x7ffff1438200)
at ../../../../jsrc/vx.c:368
#4 0x00007ffff2a0538a in jtva2 (jt=0x7ffff1438200, a=0x555555768900,
w=0x5555556d1600, self=0x7ffff3a28580 <primtab+4480>,
allranks=131072) at ../../../../jsrc/va2.c:749
#5 0x00007ffff2a01ffa in jtatomic2 (jt=0x7ffff1438200,
a=0x555555769080, w=0x5555556d1600, self=0x7ffff3a28580
<primtab+4480>)
at ../../../../jsrc/va2.c:1276
#6 0x00007ffff2944b6c in jtparsea (jt=0x7ffff1438200,
queue=0x55555571eda8, nwds=21) at ../../../../jsrc/p.c:785
#7 0x00007ffff2943314 in jtparse (jt=0x7ffff1438200,
w=0x55555571ed00) at ../../../../jsrc/p.c:290
#8 0x00007ffff2951c95 in jtimmex (jt=0x7ffff1438200,
w=0x55555571ed00) at ../../../../jsrc/px.c:54
The line number for plusXX in vx.c will be one greater than the line
number in the gmp-redo-messy branch, because I have added a line
immediately before it:
366 {if(MEMAUDIT&2)audittstack(jt);}
367 void *previous= *z;
368 *z++= jtxplus(jt,(u),(v));
369 {if(MEMAUDIT&2)audittstack(jt);}
The value of previous (and of *z) is 0. So, my thought in adding that
line was useless, because the error happens before *z gets updated and
before z gets updated.
As best as I understand it, the only difference between line 366 here
and the first line of jtxplus is the creation of a new stack frame for
the jtxplus invocation.
(And, I'm having difficulty reasoning about how that could cause
audittstack to fail...)
--
Raul
On Mon, Nov 27, 2023 at 9:44 PM Henry Rich <henryhr...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> I think you're telling me to check out the gmp-redo-messy branch. Then
> what do I look at? What is the failing line?
>
> hhr
>
> On 11/27/2023 8:17 PM, Raul Miller wrote:
> > Ok.
> >
> > I've eliminated jmpn_com as a requirement (though not from the header
> > file, you'll have to comment that out yourself), and pushed
> > gmp-redo-messy with my jacked up instance of the code.
> >
> > Note that the rest of the code base is slightly out of date, as I've
> > frozen the code base while trying to isolate this problem.
> >
> > FYI,
> >
>
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
> For information about J forums see http://www.jsoftware.com/forums.htm
----------------------------------------------------------------------
For information about J forums see http://www.jsoftware.com/forums.htm
